Happy Independence Day, this 4th of July

A repost:  Hardly a 4th of July passes that I do not think of some most amazing 4th of July circumstances.

No one tells it better than Joseph Ellis in his 2000 book, Founding Brothers (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2000):

“On the evening of July 3, 1826, [Thomas] Jefferson fell into a coma.  His last discernible words, uttered to the physician and family gathered around the bedside, indicated that he was hoping to time his exit in dramatic fashion: ‘Is it the Fourth?’ It was not, but he lingered in a semiconscious condition until shortly after noon on the magic day.  That same morning, [John] Adams collapsed in his favorite reading chair.  He lapsed into unconsciousness at almost the exact moment Jefferson died.  The end came quickly, at about five-thirty that afternoon.  He wakened for a brief moment, indicated that nothing more should be done to prolong the inevitable, then, with obvious effort, gave a final salute to his old friend with this last words: ‘Thomas Jefferson survives’, or, by another account, ‘Thomas Jefferson still lives.’  Whatever the version, he was wrong for the moment but right for the ages.”

copyright© 2000, by Joseph J. Ellis

Share

Happy Bloomsday

In honor of James Joyce and Bloomsday, I repost my entry for Bloomsday last year.

Another Bloomsday has snuck up on me, as it does every year.  This most famous of literary days – celebrating the single day in the life of Leopold Bloom wandering around Dublin depicted in James Joyce’s book, Ulysses – has special meaning for me.

James Joyce Statue

When my wife, Nancy, and I were married and planning our honeymoon in Ireland, we each committed ourselves to reading Ulysses before we married.  It was not so much that we felt that Ulysses would provide any special guide to our honeymoon in Ireland. Rather, I think we felt that as much as our getting married was (and has proven to be) a turning point in each of our lives, that committing ourselves to some Irish literature, and one of the more challenging reads that there possibly can be – before we were to meet Irish relatives of mine that we had never met – was an appropriate complement.

So, if you are looking for something really special to do, here is one suggestion.  Commit to reading Ulysses, then Richard Ellman’s biography of the same name, James Joyce, and, finally, perhaps, NORA: The Real Life of Molly Bloom, Brenda Maddox’s biography of James Joyce’s wife, Nora.

Or, if you prefer, just lift a Guinness somewhere, sometime today (preferably after 12 Noon wherever you are) to one of the greatest writers who ever lived.

Happy anniversary, too, to Ron and Nina, special friends for as long as I can remember, and who made a special commitment to each other [updated] 31 years ago today.  I think of them every Bloomsday.  Happy Bloomsday to all.

Share

Steal This Blog Content

SMB Research, where I spend much of my time these days, has now had our blog content illegally copied multiple times, and we are, sadly, hardly alone.  It seems apparent that too many people either do not bother to learn the ins and outs of intellectual property and copyright, and how to properly blog, before they start blogging, or people are so utterly incapable of creating their own website content and disrespectful of other people’s intellectual property that they simply covet and steal other people’s IP.

As I have had to say now multiple times, to my great surprise:  it is not only not OK to copy someone else’s blog content onto your website – it’s illegal.

Clearly, part of the issue is simply ignorance.  In one of the recent instances of my blog content showing up in its entirety on another website, a representative of the other website plaintively asked, “I cited your article, but how do you want it done?”

This person believed that so long as you “cited” where you were stealing the content from, then stealing it was OK.  Never mind that this person did not apparently know what a citation was, or what a copyright is, or what fair use is.  I was, frankly, more than a little annoyed to have to explain that it was simply not OK to copy someone else’s blog in its entirety and to paste it onto their website without prior permission and proper attribution.  Surely, they still teach this in school, don’t they?

I will not attempt here to address blogging “Best Practices”. Frankly, I am not that good yet at either blogging or writing;  there are other people and resources on the web far better qualified than me to address this, and you can easily find many excellent references on blogging Best Practices.

But that is not the point, is it?  The fact of the matter is that no matter new or inexperienced you are at writing or blogging, you have a responsibility to do it properly even before you do it well.  There is no excuse for not first understanding what intellectual property is, what copyright is, and what fair use is.

New or experienced, you may find these excellent resources, articles, and links useful:

Share

An Introduction to Supply Chain Management from ASU

If you are new to the world of supply chain management, there is no dearth of sources and resources for you to tap into to learn what supply chain management is, and what it means for you.  There are also no dearth of sources to find out where these resources are.

Arizona State University’s W.P. Carey school of Business, long renowned for its supply chain management program, has just put out the first in a series of 12 video modules on supply chain management.  (Which I would not have perhaps noticed but for ReliablePlant.)

The first module, “What is Supply Chain Management?“, although very basic, is an excellent (and manageable) 8-minute video worth watching for anyone looking for a supply chain 101 tutorial.

Modules to follow:

  • Module 2 – “Buy It: Managing Supply”
  • Module 3 – “Make It: Manufacturing and Operations”
  • Module 4 – “Move It: Transportation and Logistics”
  • Module 5 – “Sell It and Service It: Retail Considerations”
  • Module 6 – “Supply Chain Integration”
  • Module 7 – “Global Supply Chain Management”
  • Module 8 – “Socially Responsible Supply Chain Management”
  • Module 9 – “Business Processes”
  • Module 10 – “Measuring Performance”
  • Module 11 – “Quality Management”
  • Module 12 – “Supply Chains and Information Technology”

More information on this video series can be obtained by email to the W. P. Carey Department of Supply Chain Management, at wpcarey.scm@asu.edu/scm. Phone (480) 965-6044.

Share

The New Complexity Management

I have had a working assumption for awhile – we all have one or a few of these, don’t we? Something to keep the mental gears oiled and in good working order when our minds are not otherwise actively or productively engaged?

One of my working assumptions – stay with me on this – is that we are increasingly over-estimating our collective intelligence, and over-designing our world, our processes, our gadgets – our things – as a result.

In the supply chain world, there is the idea of complexity management.  I first encountered this idea at AMR Research several years ago  (See Steve Hochman‘s articles, Part 1 and Part 2 on the AMR Research website), and I have been fascinated by the topic since.

The increasing complexity of our world, then, and – perhaps – the increasing importance of complexity management in its various forms, are fascinating to me.  Equally fascinating to me are stories that highlight the perverse effects that complexity has on our daily lives.

I was very interested, therefore, to read a story on the front page of yesterday’s Boston Globe, by Robert Gavin:When Stints on payroll hurt the jobless“.

You would need to read this article to learn that the state of Massachusetts and the federal government do not want you to work.

That’s right – they do not want you to work.  Despite all of the talk about the unemployment rate, and the federal government’s focus on addressing the unemployment rate – the state and federal government do not want you to work.

This conclusion is unavoidable.  Federal law has been written in such a way that, even in these tough times, an unemployed worker receiving unemployment benefits can see their unemployment assistance decline if they make the ‘mistake’ of taking on part-time work that pays less than they were making full-time.

Intended or not, federal law has created a disincentive for an unemployed worker to work.

The argument can be made, of course, that this is simply the perverse effect of unemployment assistance – that it is “assistance” that supplements one’s earnings, but is not a guarantee that one’s income will not go up or go down.

Fair enough.  The fact remains, however, this assistance is in fact discouraging people from working, and sending the very real message that your state and federal government will penalize you financially if you do work.

See how complex things have become? Worse, while those who are unemployed (disclosure: I am currently receiving unemployment assistance while in day 400 of a job search) go through their daily and weekly anxieties about making ends meet with their unemployment assistance, Massachusetts officials reportedly advised the federal government of this back in November.  While Massachusetts’ Senator Kerry is reported to have sponsored some legislation, we must still wait, three months later, to learn whether the federal government really does not want you to work, or just wrote bad law with unintended consequences.

So perhaps the high unemployment rate is not that surprising.  I have never accepted that there are not things that federal government can do to put people back to work.  Paying people to not work is, in my mind,  probably not one of the better ideas the government has ever had. Closely followed by taking this long to fix a problem that, arguably, should not have happened in the first place.

I say – if you are going to create the complexity, then you accept the responsibility to manage the complexity.  How’s that?

Share

Your Bureaucracy is No Excuse (a rant)

How is the customer service you have been getting lately?

Our customer service should be better than ever, shouldn’t it? After all, the slackers and underperformers have all been laid off.  This should result in our getting better customer service than ever.

Sadly, the tale I am about tell is, I fear, more common than not. At the risk of painting with a broad brush, I must keep the parties involved unidentified for the simple reason I would prefer to avoid the rath of any Kafkaesque bureaucracy right now who could make my life miserable by losing a check, my paperwork, or my record.

You surely know what I mean by Kafkaesque bureaucracy. You know one when you see one: the company that is so very careful to not put any contact names on their website, no direct telephone numbers, no email addresses -  just a physical address a few states away.  The company may have an “800″ or “877″ telephone number that runs you through a seemingly interminable phone menu, that may or may not offer you the choice of speaking to a live person, and may or may not disconnect you at will, the cause never being clear or identified – or apparently fixed.

A company like this just relies on you to not know any better.

Sure the company has problems – it may be deskjockies or managers who don’t care, IT systems that don’t work the way they should, business processes that make no sense and require too many unnecessary pieces of paper.  Perhaps it is simply one of those companies who knows that you need them more than they need you, and so why do they need to bother to respond to you for?

It is not like you are actually going to be able to figure out what state their office is really located in; or, even if you could, then be able to identify or reach the state bureaucracy that is responsible for fielding complaints.

It is not like that state bureaucracy, even if you could find it, isn’t going to just take your story back to the company; and the company surely can turn this into a never-ending paper chase that is effectively a black hole.

Sure you can check Complaints Board or Ripoff Report, Scam.com,  or possibly Consumer Reports, or the Better Business Bureau.  Only the more enterprising and frustrated among us might even make our way to an attorney general’s office or an agency overseeing the insurance companies and benefits administration companies in the state.

But we all know how this goes, don’t we?

Too many times, the company seems to look first for the how to just make the problem go away (this time), rather than looking at your issue as an opportunity to both address your immediate dissatisfaction while also demonstrating their commitment and the capability to making your future relationship with them a thing to cherish. (Say what you will about T-Mobile; they have been among the best at exemplary customer service.)

So instead of the company taking the time to (1) understand what went wrong, (2) determining how to fix it now and forever, and (3) providing you with a sincere apology, and a satisfactory explanation of what went wrong and how they intend to fix it, as well as any additional consideration warranted – you get only form letter or an auto-reply email and a temporary fix to the problem.

Why do I bring all of this up?

As I am one of the millions  in transition, I am the fortunate recipient of COBRA benefits – for which my family and I am very thankful, let there be no mistake.

I received on January 6th a letter dated 7 weeks prior (on December 1st) informing me that my benefits are being transferred to Company X and Cobra Benefits administrator company Y.

  • As of today, 2 weeks later, and 3 weeks into 2010, I still do not have medical benefits cards for me and my family.
  • I have just been told – only because I asked – that the benefits administrator company Y decided to withhold my medical cards. No matter I do not owe them a payment, they have not told me I owe another payment, or that, in any case, there is a 30-day grace period; they just decided, without telling me, not to send any medical cards to me until I make another payment.
  • But – they have not sent any payment coupons to me. They told me they were going to send coupons.  They have known since December 1st they had to send payment coupons to me.  And Company X told me they would.  But, then the promising is the easy part, isn’t it?  It is execution that is so darned difficult.  No one from Company X ever bothered to follow up to see if this really happened. And, No, I have yet to see any payment coupons from Company Y.
  • In fact, my information was only entered into the Benefits Administrator’s system when I called up the Company X HR rep to ask why their instructions did not work.  Company X never followed up with Company Y, and so could not know that Company Y’s IT systems were not working correctly;  Company X – true to form – certainly was not about to proactively alert its customers that its faulty IT systems meant people were effectively with out working benefits for the preceding couple of weeks.
  • So when Company Y finally had no choice but to confess their IT problems, they had me type into a support screen field the detail of the kinds of medical coverage I wanted, asking me to trust that they would put this right in manually for me.  Whoops – there’s that trust thing again – this was 2 weeks ago, and as of earlier today, my selections still were not fed to the insurance company.
    Lessons from this:
  • If you are a head of HR, particularly at a company that throws off tens of millions of cash every quarter, scrimping on the cost of a good Benefits Admin company is bad news for you.  You should probably be able to afford the extra people, if that’s what it takes, to make sure that the promises you make are being kept by other parties.
  • If you are a head of HR, look beyond the Benefits Admin company’s prominent announcements of Six Sigma, and other awards. Are they willing to provide and to put onto their website, contact names, direct working phone numbers and direct email addresses for their customers? Does their “800″ or “877″ phone number work every time, and can you reliably connect to a live person on that number? If you and/or your benefits administrator is not willing to provide every customer with direct contact information for people at the Benefits Admin company – and to put this information prominently on the Benefit Admin company’s website – this should be huge ‘Red Flag’.
  • If you are a head of HR, do not trust that an insurance company or Benefits Admin company is going to abide by the promises you make in a letter; you will need to make them abide to the letter of your letter, and to follow up to make sure that they are abiding by the promises you have made on their behalf.
  • If you are a Benefits Administration company: If you are not willing to put contact names, working direct phone numbers AND direct email addresses on your website, and provide these to your customers, you are probably going to come to regret it.  Your customers expect this, and your failure to do so prominently signals one of two things:   Either your service is so bad (or worse, fraudulent) that you are unwilling to service your customers in this way – OR  your service, business processes, or customer service is so poor that you cannot manage the resulting phone calls and email traffic.  Ether way, it is not right to foist your self-inflicted wounds on your customers, and they, increasingly, will not accept it.
  • If you are a Benefits Administration company, don’t even think of  trying to make up the rules as you go along, ignoring your promises on your website about the grace period or my next payment date, and decide to just not send out my medical cards to me without calling me.  Isn’t that one reason why you have my phone number?

It’s three weeks into 2010. If you cannot handle my benefits administration competently, then there are probably at least several among the 15 million unemployed who would be glad to give it a try.

Heck, we might be able to address the unemployment problem and reduce the amount of deplorable customer service at the same time.  Perhaps enough of us just need to say that customer service like this is just not acceptable.  Now, wouldn’t that be a nice Win-Win?

Thanks for listening.

Share

Sizing up Small-to-Medium Business (SMB)

What is the difference between a “small” business, and a “small-to-medium” business?  (caution: shameless self-promotion).  Read my commentary over at the SMB Research Blog.

Share

Job Satisfaction At an All-Time Low

What does it say about us and about the state of our capitalist system that job satisfaction is, according to one report at least, at an all-time low?

Everyone, in my opinion, ought to be disappointed and concerned about this. At a time when we have more and much better management education than ever before, a much better educated workforce, more technology to assist us in our jobs, and arguably a more robust exchange and sharing of ideas about business, management, collaboration, and best practices than we have ever had – how could job satisfaction be on a 20+ year slide, as reported, to its lowest point ever?

Is anyone else as incredulous at this as I am?
What is going on? Anyone have any idea?

It is comforting that Gallup at least is reporting (August 2009) that “satisfaction scores [are] at or near record highs for many aspects of employment, workers are showing, perhaps, a bit greater appreciation for their jobs than in years past.”

The divergence between the Gallup and Conference Board survey results bears closer examination to determine the reasons for these different readings.

Nevertheless, this does not reflect well on the leaders, managers, and management educators among us. This should cause some reexamination of how we are educating and training people, how we are managing people, and perhaps even what we expect from our professional lives.

It may be unavoidable at a time when an unemployment rate hovering above 10% (and perhaps even above 17% depending on what you are measuring) means that there are more than 16 million people unemployed that many people will question aspects of the social contract implied in the prevailing employee-at-will arrangement.

Nevertheless, reports of a 20+ year slide in our collective professional satisfaction and happiness should be cause for some soul-searching among all of us, not least by the leaders, managers, and management educators among us.

Recommended Reads:

Share

Do I Know You? Identity Authentication in the Real and Digital Worlds

I had occasion recently to sit down to talk with Reliable Identities Wes Kussmaul, accomplished entrepreneur, author, and prolific Internet tinkerer.  Wes experienced early success founding the Delphi Internet service.  (Some of the more seasoned among you may remember Delphi as being one of the early online services, along with CompuServe, Prodigy,  and AOL.)

These days, Wes is talking about another frontier – identity authentication.  It is interesting to think that we are as inattentive to establishing and authenticating everyone ‘s digital identity as we are focused on proving and authenticating people’s identities in the real world.

Think about this.  Think of the number of real-world transactions you engage in during the course of each day, each week, each year, and how many times you are asked to provide proof of your identity using your birth certificate, driver’s license, social security number, or passport. Each of these pieces of documentation is based on one or another form of face-to-face authentication.  In this way, isn’t nearly every significant real-world interaction based upon some form of face-to-face authentication?

To operate a motor vehicle you need both a driver’s license (which includes a face-to-face authentication) and an automobile registration (and, often, insurance, as well).  To operate on the Internet, you need only a username and password, and the nearest internet cafe.

The “wild, wild west” metaphor may be over-used, but it remains relevant, and many times we never really know with whom we are interacting.  Yes, our access credentials get authenticated every time we log onto a specific website, and OpenID is making this easier for us every day.  However, who are we really interacting with on the internet, and how do we know who we are interacting with?  In the worst case scenarios, there have obviously been too many well-publicized stories of people taking advantage of the veil of secrecy and deception afforded them by the Internet to tragic ends.

Wes Kussmaul has given no little thought to the lack of identity authentication in the digital world, proposing his ideas – among other places – to the International Telecommunications Union, and in at least a couple of books, the most notable of which is Quiet Enjoyment.  (Wes and PKI Press have provided copies of Quiet Enjoyment and another Wes Kussmaul book, Own Your Privacy to me.)

Quiet Enjoyment (PKI Press, 2004)

One of Wes’ more compelling ideas for me is around the concept of identity quality.  It is possible, Wes believes, to construct quantitative ways to measure the quality of an identity authentication.

Conceivably, then, this provides a range of identity authenticity which could then be applied to the type and  level of access that a person wanted.  Just as we have seen differentiated levels of service at the airport provided to people who choose to pay for to have their identities authenticated, there could possibly be differentiated levels of access to websites on the Internet based on the quality of an identity authentication.  So, for example, perhaps not everyone gets equal access to a teen chat site where there is the danger of someone impersonating a teenager for malicious purposes.

Some aspects of these ideas are likely to be more challenging, in practice if not in acceptance.  The idea seems to be that people would be issued a certificate of authenticity, attesting to the authenticity of your identity, much as a notary public attests to the authentic correspondence between your identity and your written signature today.  There are, however, qualitative differences between the kind of identity authentication that Wes seems to be proposing and the function of notary public, which raises some questions about scalability, privacy, and the balance between security and convenience.

On the issue of anonymity, Wes is quick to point out that identity authentication and anonymity are not mutually exclusive, and that the intent of identity authentication is not to render anonymity obsolete.

There are, I find, at least a couple of difficulties in this discussion:

  1. Inevitably, the discussion gets down to a technical level that some may find challenging – two-factor vs. three-factor vs. x-factor level authentication; Private/Public key infrastructures, and things like SAML; and
  2. Definitions (trust, authenticity, access, authorization…): these are words that (a) have both real-world and digital-world meanings, and (b) in either world, have widely varying usage and meaning according to the context.
  3. The question about identity authentication too often gets buried or lost, it seems to me, under the weight of focus given to identity theft, a related, but separate issue, and authorization and access – how identity is applied at the application layer.

The type of identity authentication that Wes is talking about, however, is not system- or application-level access authorization, and so is separate and distinct from the sort of credentials authentication that is embodied most often in what is called identity access and management (IAM) solutions.

Quiet Enjoyment is not a book for the timid – its table of contents runs 10 pages.  But it will make you think more deeply about trust, identity, identity authenticity, and many of the issues involved with how we trust the identity in the digital world.  Wes seems to argue that we are at, or nearing, an inflection point, and I am not so sure that he is wrong about that.  Former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff was quite compelling, I thought, when he spoke – on more than one occasion, I believe – about identity being a critical asset, and becoming even more so with every passing day.  Wes Kussmaul’s ideas and efforts to address the issue are worthy of greater discussion.

Recommended Reads:

Share

Thoughts and Readings on The Software Maintenance Fee Model

As I read the transcript of Oracle’s recent 1Q2010 results, and some analyst reactions to it, I am more and more intrigued by the market forces at work in the third-party support area.  As almost everyone knows, maintenance and support fees are the lifeblood of many enterprise vendors.  While maintenance and support from an end-user’s enterprise software vendor provides excellent protection for a large investment, the support comes at a price that some, if not many, consider onerous.

I have been part of many discussions with clients around strategies for managing their relationships with their vendors of choice; maintenance and support have often part of that discussion.  End-users are really struggling with the concept of being so locked into paying these support fees, often for software that is not even implemented, with so little recourse.  We all have heard from end-users about the shockingly high percentage of their IT budgets that goes just to KTLO (keeping the lights on), leaving precious little for new investment.  The 82% of its IT budget that HP recently reported for “just to keep things running” is typical.  Here is where the frustration starts.

What exacerbates the frustration is when the end-users hear software vendors boasting of margins as high as 90%, and talking about the difficulty of spending through all of the cash.  End-users are expecting (and are hearing) that they will benefit by not only getting excellent support, but by also providing the cash base on which the vendors can develop better, newer functionality.  When, however, there are figures showing in some cases declining investments in R&D, and Salesforce.com’s CEO Marc Benioff is talking about “the end of maintenance“, as reported by Vinnie Mirchandani, surely many end-users are wondering how eagerly their enterprise vendors are pursuing new technologies that possibly threaten the enterprise vendors’ maintenance and support streams.

The software vendors themselves have to be wondering if they aren’t to some extent eating their own young when their software maintenance fees consume so much of their customers’ IT budgets that their customers cannot procure more of the new functionality (funded by the maintenance fees) that the software vendors would like to sell to them.

Thus you have the proverbial dog chasing his tail – or the “Perfect Storm”.  Choose your own metaphor, but the situation is only likelier to get more and more interesting, as these opposing forces gain in strength.

Recommended Reads:

•    The Maintenance Renewal Landscape
Dennis Howlett on ZDNet
October 23, 2009

•    SAP-Siemens: He said, she said
deal architect / Vinnie Mirchandani on disruptive trends and economics in technology
Vinnie Mirchandani
October 22, 2009

•    Software Maintenance Fees: An Outdated Cash Cow?
Adrian Gonzalez
Posted on Oct 13 2009

•    Tuesday’s Tip: Call Vendors On Their Bluff About “Rev-Rec” And Software Maintenance Contracts
A Software Insider’s Point of View
By R “Ray” Wang
September 29, 2009

•    An Emerging Threat to Oracle and SAP
Barrons online
Mark Veverka
September 28, 2009

•    Revisiting My 2006 “ERP Doomsday Scenario”
The Future of Enterprise Software
Bruce Richardson
September 23, 2009

•    Oracle demands information from Rimini Street to boost SAP lawsuit
Computerworld
Chris Kanaracus
August 27, 2009

•    Why vendors resist negotiating software maintenance fees
The Enterprise System Spectator
Frank Scavo
Wednesday, November 26, 2008

•    News Analysis: Rimini Street Launches Third Party Maintenance for SAP
A Software Insider’s Point of View
R “Ray” Wang
May 16, 2009

•    Cutting software maintenance costs 101
ZDNET
Larry Dignan
May 12, 2009

•    Rimini Street, SAP, and the future of third-party maintenance
Enterprise System Spectator
Frank Scavo
May 11, 2009

•    News Analysis: Oracle Waives Fees On Extended Support Offerings
A Software Insider’s Point of View
R. “Ray” Wang
May 4, 2009

•    SAP postpones its maintenance fee price hike
The Enterprise System Spectator
Frank Scavo
April 29, 2009

•    Unaffordable at any cost
deal architect / Vinnie Mirchandani on disruptive trends and economics in technology
Vinnie Mirchandani
April 29, 2009

•    The End of Maintenance
deal architect / Vinnie Mirchandani on disruptive trends and economics in technology
Vinnie Mirchandani
April 28, 2009

•    Defending Maintenance Pricing
deal architect / Vinnie Mirchandani on disruptive trends and economics in technology
Vinnie Mirchandani
April 23, 2009

•    Rethinking Software Support / Recession Puts New Focus on Oracle Maintenance Contracts
Wall Street Journal
Jessica Hodgson
March 12, 2009

•    Oracle: Innovation Beehive, Innovation Light or Innovation Free?
deal architect / Vinnie Mirchandani on disruptive trends and economics in technology
Vinnie Mirchandani
February 26, 2009

•    Software Maintenance Fees: Time For This Model To Change?
InformationWeek
Mary Hayes Weier
January 24, 2009

•    Legal basis for third-party ERP support industry
Frank Scavo, from his blog, Enterprise System Spectator
June 12, 2008

Share